he body was not burnt
but buried, and the grave became a _bidental_, and
_religiosum_.

[64] For the intricate pontifical law of burial-places
see Wissowa, p. 409. The quotation from Masurius is in
Gellius iv. 9. 8, "M. Sabinus in commentariis quos de
indigenis composuit." The word _sanctitas_ is here used
merely by way of explanation and not in a technical
sense; for which see Marq. p. 145 and references; but it
seems to have had a special use in the cult of the dead.
(See below, p. 470.)

[65] Quoted by Macrobius, _Sat._ iii. 3. 8. For
Sulpicius see _Social Life at Rome in the Age of
Cicero_, p. 118 foll.

[66] Festus, p. 278. This Aelius lived at the end of the
Republican period, and belonged to the school of
Sulpicius; Schanz, _Gesch. der roem. Lit._ i. pt. 2, p.
486.

[67] _e.g._ the three days on which the _mundus_ was
open were all _comitiales_, though at the same time
_religiosi_.

[68] _R.K._ pp. 376, 377.

[69] The authorities for the story are Verrius Flaccus,
_ap._ Gell. v. 17, and Macrobius, _Sat._ i. 16. 21.

[70] For the extent of the taboo see Gell. iv. 9. 5;
Macr. i. 16. 18.

[71] Gell. v. 17. 3 foll. (_annalium quinto_).

[72] Festus, p. 278.

[73] _R.F._ p. 151.

[74] Wissowa, _R.K._ p. 377, note 6.

[75] Cic. _ad Qu. Fratr._ ii. 4. 2.

[76] Wissowa, _R.K._ pp. 187, 189.

[77] _R.K._ p. 377. Gell. iv. 9. 5 says that the
_multitudo imperitorum_ confused the _dies religiosi_
and _dies nefasti_. The distinction is most clearly seen
in the fact that on _dies religiosi_ the temples were
(or ought to be) shut, and "res divinas facere" was
ill-omened (Gell., _ib._), while on _dies nefasti_ the
latter was regular, such days being made over to the
gods. No wonder that Gellius brands the popular
ignorance with such words as _prave_ and _perperam_.

[78] See Prof. Rhys's paper read before the British
Academy, "Notes on the Coligny Calendar," p. 33 and
elsewhere.

[79] _Introduction_, p. 65 foll.

[80] Since writing this sentence I have read the paper
by W. Otto on "Religio and Superstitio" in _Archiv fuer
Religionswissenschaft_, 1909, p. 533 foll.; in which at
p. 544 he hints at a connection of _religio_ with the
practice of taboo. With some of his conclusions,
however, I cannot agree.